Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement

A particle has a mass and/or charge . These mass and charge are causes of all types of forces and fields .

In the gravitational-field , the cause of force is mass .

Atomic particles also have mass and they generate force/field due to their mass . Do we call these force/field as gravitational-field ?

So, i use the term force-field to generalize any force generated due to mass .

Click to expand...

Well don't. We live in a world of human language. You can call an apple a bunch of atoms. Nobody would know what you are talking about. I call the Aether space-time now. You have to be able to communicate.

Well don't. We live in a world of human language. You can call an apple a bunch of atoms. Nobody would know what you are talking about. I call the Aether space-time now. You have to be able to communicate.

Spacetime is an "Einstein Aether". GR uses tensors, operators and vector matrices that are very similar to those used by fluid dynamicists. So, spacetime is actually a frictionless, massless, viscosity free fluid that can respond to its own density fluctuations. If spacetime becomes dense enough, we call it "matter". So, we have a philosophical question: is space a vacuum or a plenum? It does not matter. The theory of relativity works either way. The closest we can achieve to this in the lab is Helium 4, a liquid phase of helium, close to absolute zero, that shows pretty nearly to the same kinds of properties, which is why it is studied so diligently. It is really freaky stuff!

Spacetime is an "Einstein Aether". GR uses tensors, operators and vector matrices that are very similar to those used by fluid dynamicists. So, spacetime is actually a frictionless, massless, viscosity free fluid that can respond to its own density fluctuations.

Click to expand...

If spacetime becomes dense enough, we call it "matter".

Click to expand...

Is there any mathematical equation for your above statement ? ... or... You are considering Einsteins' e=mc^2 .

So, we have a philosophical question: is space a vacuum or a plenum? It does not matter. The theory of relativity works either way. The closest we can achieve to this in the lab is Helium 4, a liquid phase of helium, close to absolute zero, that shows pretty nearly to the same kinds of properties, which is why it is studied so diligently. It is really freaky stuff!

If you look at direct but separate measurements of space and time, space or distance can be measured with a static tool like a meter stick. Time, on the other hand, needs a dynamic tool like a clock, which requires energy. Therefore time is the dynamic aspect of space-time. Space is the passive aspect. GR has mass/energy, while SR has kinetic energy. These impact space-time first through time and then through space, via space-time. It should be called time-space to reflect the priorities with respect to the dynamic connections to GR and SR.

Since the energy of the universe moves from higher to lower energy and since time needs to move forward, this suggests time is the reason for the first law. Space being the passive variable is impacted by the connection within time-space.

Time-space has 3 time dimensions, t0, t1 and t2. T1 is connected to velocity; distance/time while t2 is connected to accelerations such as from force; distance/sec/sec . T0 is connected to mass which provides potential in time even when there is no apparent motion within space-time.

As an example of t0, if we took a snap shot picture of a ball in motion, time has stopped in the photo, so there is no t1 (velocity) or t2 acceleration in the photo. What is left is the potential associated with the static matter; t0. It has potential energy from which time has the potential to emanate even if there is no apparent movement or apparent change.

Space-time is a mental construct as is time-space. Time-space reflects the energy connection associated with time and makes velocity and force special cases of time. SR is all about t0 and t1, while GR is all about t0, t1 and t2.

An interesting application of time-space is connected to explaining the basis for the uncertainty principle, which space-time cannot do. Say we had a baseball pitcher throwing a ball. We take a still picture but with too slow of a shutter speed. What we will get is motion blur. Motion blur will create uncertainty in position. If we knew the momentum of the ball we could calculate its exact position, etc.

Because this is a still picture, we have stopped time down to t0, so only the matter is visible but not apparent movement in space-time. What has happened is there is excess time potential or t1 in the photo, but the still picture does not allow time or t1 or t2 to be expressed. The connection of time to space-time or time-space results in the time potential transferred to distance, via the uncertainty in distance, since distance is passive and not impacted by stopped time. The photo captures the hand-off from time to distance in the film.

If you look at direct but separate measurements of space and time, space or distance can be measured with a static tool like a meter stick. Time, on the other hand, needs a dynamic tool like a clock, which requires energy. Therefore time is the dynamic aspect of space-time. Space is the passive aspect. GR has mass/energy, while SR has kinetic energy. These impact space-time first through time and then through space, via space-time. It should be called time-space to reflect the priorities with respect to the dynamic connections to GR and SR.

Click to expand...

Do you mean to say any of the following three numbered statements ?

1. Space is mass or energy .

or,

2. Time is mass or energy .

or,

3. Spacetime is mass or energy .

Spacetime is the manifold of space and time . This manifold holds all the mass and energy of our universe . Spacetime is the container and mass and energy are the contents of this container . It is obvious that the contents occupy full volume the container . So , total mass and energy of our universe is spread out throughout this manifold of space-time .

You've got it backwards, force(in the form of gravity)cause spacetime to curve. There is no force that causes a light beam to bend, to it's perspective it is following a straight line(same goes for a moon). It is that "straight line" that is bent into a curve by gravity.

How 'lightyear' can describe time ?

Click to expand...

A light year is a distance light travels in a year. It takes it a year to do so. So if you are looking at a star 100 light years away, you are seeing that star as it was 100 years ago. If that star blows up today, you would still be seeing it as a whole star for 100 years. If our sun was to nova right now, you would not feel any effects or see any difference until 8 minutes from now. Looking out into space(distance)is looking backward in time.